Is data science still the sexiest job?

Photo Credit: Mahdis Mousavi

In 2012, this Harvard Business Review article argued that data science will be the sexiest job in the 21st century. At the time, data science was new and unheard of, with companies eager to use data scientists to revolutionize their practices. Is it still the sexiest job now? Well sort of, but not really. The field has gone through some significant transformations since these “wild west” early days. Now, data science as a discipline has become more streamlined and specialized.

Often key data scientists have slightly different titles like machine learning specialist, data engineers, etc. Machine learning and AI technology have changed the way data is processed and analyzed. This has automated parts of the tasks that data scientists have spent a long time working on, such as data cleaning (which still can take a long time) and initial data exploration, shifting the work necessary for humans to perform in the field to more specialized and fringe tasks. For example, many data scientists have become machine learning specialists focusing on fine-tuning these models or communication specialists focusing on how to use their business expertise to communicate complex findings with stakeholders and help decide what they should do about the results.

I think more than the technology, what has driven the specialization is the routinization of data science processes within an organization. Gone are the days of a lone data scientist at a company doing cutting edge work by themselves just figuring out what is possible. Data science as a field has fallen within the discipline and expectations of corporate bureaucracies. In its early stages, most data scientists worked alone or in small teams doing pioneering, experimental work figuring out how to apply the tools of the field to their organization in ways that people did not know were possible. That can still be the case. In every job I have had as a data scientist, for example, I have been the first data scientist in the entire organization or specific department I work in. But this is increasingly rare. Data science is now mostly one department at an organization, doing important but predictable routine work. All white collar professions get grafted in the “corporate machine” like this overtime.

Recent AI technology has contributed to this too by automating many of the low-level data processing and analyzing tasks so that non-specialists can perform them on their own. This is great, increasing the accessibility of tasks once considered obscure or even “magical” by regular people. Back in the day, to do much of any data modeling, you had to code it yourself, requiring a level of programming knowledge that was beyond a typical office worker or manager. That’s why they needed to hire a data scientist to analyze the data themselves. I hope in the long run using AI tools to tinker with data themselves and try out different theories will increase the data literacy and skillsets of regular professionals. It also means that data scientists are increasingly spending less time on these tasks and have moved to more complex, specialized work that still require quite a bit of technical human thinking.

Another factor that has driven this routinization is the increase in the number of people studying and doing data science. As demand for data science increase, more people have tried to become a data scientist, whether by receiving a degree in it or transitioning their careers into the field. This has led to more data scientists in the market. If this trend continues, eventually the field will become oversaturated, but the demand still seems to be higher than the supply, with more open jobs than people able to fill them.

This has still redefined what data science is. When many people join a field, it becomes difficult to maintain the same level of pioneering eclecticism. Instead, the types of tasks people do become routinized and standardized to provide consistency for a larger number of people, paralleling the transformation Max Weber describes religious movements undergoing from a charismatic leader to a routine social institution.

All of this leads to the current state of data science. This is not necessarily bad, but it is different. So, is data science still the sexiest job? Yes and no. Some of its specialist roles like machine learning specialist, I think, better maintain the excitement and cutting edge of that moniker. It’s still in high-demand, however, a fine field to work in.

Data-Driven Diversity: How Evidence-Based HR Can Create Equitable Organizations (with Élide Souza)

What is it like to use data science to understand employees in an organization to help improve people’s experiences at the firm? In this next podcast interview, I spoke with Élide Souza, a people’s data science at the Brazilian bank, Banco BV. She manages a data science team that researches how to improve employee’s experience and increase diversity.

This is part of a new trend called “People Analytics” where organizations hire data scientists within their HR (Human Resources) departments to conduct social science research in order to help improve organizational culture. In our conversation, she describes how she approaches such social research, including how she addresses potential bias, approaches intervention, and navigates the ethical implications of such work.

As a fellow social science-focused data scientist, I find this work fascinating.

Conversing with AI: Interview with Chelsea Wang about Communications with Artificial Intelligence Systems (Part 3 of 3)

In the final part of our conversation, Chelsea Wang explains how her background in psychology has influenced her work in artificial intelligence. In particular, she describes how her social science background helped her develop and deploy her own version of the Mutual Theory of Mind as a psychologist within the field of artificial intelligence. When socializing, humans employ a recursive feedback loop of conceptualization of each other, and she explores the application of similar concepts to conversational AI systems.

She concludes by discussing her journey as a PhD student: what led her to seek her dissertation and her plans afterwards to use what she is learning now to conduct innovative and impactful work in the business world.

Click here to learn more about the Interview Series.

More about Chelsea:

Qiaosi Wang (Chelsea) is a fifth-year PhD candidate in Human-Centered Computing at Georgia Institute of Technology. Chelsea is a human-centered AI researcher and her PhD dissertation work focuses on building the Mutual Theory of Mind framework, inspired by the basic human capability to surmise what is happening in others’ minds (also known as “Theory of Mind”), to enhance mutual understanding between humans and AIs during human-AI communication. Her work specifically focuses on the human-AI communication process during AI-mediated social interaction in online learning, where AI agents can connect socially isolated online learners by providing personalized social recommendations to online learners based on information extracted from students’ posts on the online class discussion forums.

Chelsea received her Bachelor of Science degrees in Psychology and Informatics from the University of Washington, Seattle. In her free time, Chelsea loves hiking, playing with her cat, Gouda, and spending time at bouldering gyms. 

To learn more about Chelsea and the sources we referenced in our conversation:

Conversing with AI: Interview with Chelsea Wang about Communications with Artificial Intelligence Systems (Part 2 of 3)

Chelsea Wang has spent many years trying to improve the cognitive process of artificial intelligence systems to better interact with humans. In this second part of our conversation, she explains her theories about metacognition, intelligence, and potential anthropomorphization of AI “thought” processes. Through this, she explicates her vision and approach to the potential social life of AI.

Click here to learn more about the Interview Series.

More about Chelsea:

Qiaosi Wang (Chelsea) is a fifth-year PhD candidate in Human-Centered Computing at Georgia Institute of Technology. Chelsea is a human-centered AI researcher and her PhD dissertation work focuses on building the Mutual Theory of Mind framework, inspired by the basic human capability to surmise what is happening in others’ minds (also known as “Theory of Mind”), to enhance mutual understanding between humans and AIs during human-AI communication. Her work specifically focuses on the human-AI communication process during AI-mediated social interaction in online learning, where AI agents can connect socially isolated online learners by providing personalized social recommendations to online learners based on information extracted from students’ posts on the online class discussion forums.

Chelsea received her Bachelor of Science degrees in Psychology and Informatics from the University of Washington, Seattle. In her free time, Chelsea loves hiking, playing with her cat, Gouda, and spending time at bouldering gyms. 

To learn more about Chelsea and the sources we referenced in our conversation:

Conversing with AI: Interview with Chelsea Wang about Communications with Artificial Intelligence Systems (Part 1 of 3)

Chelsea Wang describes her work developing and refining the communication processes between artificial intelligence and humans, particularly the Mutual Theory of Mind framework she has helped build. As a doctoral student in Human-Computer Interaction, she also discusses her journey from human psychology to the social interactions of AI.

Click here to learn more about the Interview Series.

More about Chelsea:

Qiaosi Wang (Chelsea) is a fifth-year PhD candidate in Human-Centered Computing at Georgia Institute of Technology. Chelsea is a human-centered AI researcher and her PhD dissertation work focuses on building the Mutual Theory of Mind framework, inspired by the basic human capability to surmise what is happening in others’ minds (also known as “Theory of Mind”), to enhance mutual understanding between humans and AIs during human-AI communication. Her work specifically focuses on the human-AI communication process during AI-mediated social interaction in online learning, where AI agents can connect socially isolated online learners by providing personalized social recommendations to online learners based on information extracted from students’ posts on the online class discussion forums.

Chelsea received her Bachelor of Science degrees in Psychology and Informatics from the University of Washington, Seattle. In her free time, Chelsea loves hiking, playing with her cat, Gouda, and spending time at bouldering gyms. 

To learn more about Chelsea and the sources we referenced in our conversation:

Data Science Storytelling: Quantitative UX Research in Google Cloud with Randy Au (Part 2 of 2)

In this second part of my interview with Randy Au, he discusses the techniques he used to teach himself to code and his approach to programming and data science as a social scientist.

Here is Part 1 of our interview.

Prior to joining Google, he spent a decade as a mixture of a data analyst, data scientist, and data engineer at various startups in New York City and before that, studied Communications. In his newsletter, he discusses data science topics like data collection and data quality from a social science perspective. Outside of work he often engages in far too many hobbies, taken to absurd lengths.

Click here to learn more about the Interview Series this is a part of.

More about Randy:

Data Science Storytelling: Quantitative UX Research in Google Cloud with Randy Au (Part 1 of 2)

Randy Au, a Quantitative UX Researcher at Google, explains how he leverages his backgrounds in communication, statistics, and programming as a quantitative UX researcher in Google Cloud to analyze and improve Cloud Storage products.

Here is Part 2 of our interview.

Prior to joining Google, he spent a decade as a mixture of a data analyst, data scientist, and data engineer at various startups in New York City and before that, studied Communications. In his newsletter, he discusses data science topics like data collection and data quality from a social science perspective. Outside of work he often engages in far too many hobbies, taken to an absurd lengths.

Click here to learn more about the Interview Series.

More about Randy:

Designing Machine Learning Products Anthropologically: Building Relatable Machine Learning

Loader Loading…
EAD Logo Taking too long?

Reload Reload document
| Open Open in new tab

Download [2.38 MB]

How do we build relatable machine learning models that regular people can understand? This is a presentation about how design principles apply to the development of machine learning systems. Too often in data science, machine learning software is not built with regular people who will interact with it in mind.

I argue that in order to make machine learning software relatable, we need to use design thinking to intentionally build in mechanisms for users to form their own mental models of how the machine learning software works. Failing to include theses helps cultivate the common sense that machine learning is a black box for users.

I gave three different versions of this talk at Quant UX Con on June 8th, 2022, the Royal Institute of Anthropology’s annual conference on June 10th, 2022, and Google’s AI + Design Tooling Research Symposium on August 5th, 2022.

I hope you find it interesting and feel free to share any thoughts you might have.

Thank you for the conference and talk organizers for making this happen, and I appreciate all the insightful conversations I had about the role of design thinking in building relatable machine learning.

Data Science and Game Design: Conversation with Clayton Sisson (Part 3 of 3)

During the final part of our conversation, Clayton discusses his journey from game design to data science, including what inspired them to study data science and what it has been like learning and working in this new field. Clayton Sisson is a game designer and aspiring data scientist, passionate about how data science can shed light on human behavior.

This is the next installment in my Interview Series. During Over the course of the three parts of our conversation, we discuss how game design thinking can help develop usable and useful machine learning products within data science.

Here is Part 1 and Part 2 of our interview.

Resources:

Data Science and Game Design: Conversation with Clayton Sisson (Part 2 of 3)

In Part 2, we discuss how to apply the design concept shikake to machine learning systems. Clayton Sisson is a game designer and aspiring data scientist, passionate about how data science can shed light on human behavior.

This is the next installment in my Interview Series. During Over the course of the three parts of our conversation, we discuss how game design thinking can help develop usable and useful machine learning products within data science.

Here is Part 1 and Part 3 of our interview.

Resources: